Wednesday, March 26, 2025

URBANIZATION TRENDS

For the first time in history, more than half the world’s people are urban. Between now and 2030, the world’s rural population is expected to remain largely static, while the urban population is projected to grow by 1.5 billion people.

By 2030, 60 percent of the global population will live in cities. Over 90 percent of that urban growth will occur in cities and towns of the developing world, mostly in Africa and Asia.

The urbanization of the global population has fundamental ramifications for the economy, society and the environment. Urban centres currently cover only a small part of the world’s land surface - 0.51 percent of the total land area. However, urban areas will expand significantly during the next two to three decades.

Based on current trends, urban land cover will increase by 1.2 million km2 by 2030, nearly tripling global urban land area between 2000 and 2030. Cities cover a small part of the world, but their physical and ecological footprints are much larger. Cities accounted for 82 percent of global GDP in 20143 and by 2025 this will rise to an estimated 88 percent. There will be 230 new cities by then, all in middle-income countries. One hundred cities in China alone may account for 30 percent of global GDP at that time.

Cities produce more than 70 percent of the world’s greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions4 and use 80 percent of the world’s energy.5 The International Energy Agency projects that

urban energy-related GHG emissions will rise from around 67 percent today to 74 percent

by 2030.6 Cities also host most of the world’s critical infrastructure, key development assets, political institutions and major socioeconomic activities. Global analyses of climate change and disaster impacts show that a high proportion of the people and economic activity affected by extreme weather events is concentrated in urban centres.

Cities’ vulnerability goes beyond exposure to climate change impacts and extreme events. Violence and crime are pressing issues in many urban areas. The urbanization process in developing countries is often poorly managed, resulting in inequitable, exclusionary and fragmented cities and increased risk of violence, especially among disenfranchised sections of the urban population that cannot access the formal political system, including refugees and Internally Displaced People (IDPs).

While there are challenges to be addressed, there are also critical opportunities to be seized in making growth more sustainable, inclusive and equitable, cities more resilient and their inhabitants less vulnerable. Urban residents in well-planned cities enjoy better

access to employment opportunities, health care, education and public services compared to their rural counterparts. Well-managed urban areas have lower per capita energy, climate and ecosystem footprints and lower costs per person for infrastructure and basic services. And the concentration of resources, ideas and energy in urban areas is fertile ground for the creativity and technological innovation needed to solve the many developmental challenges the world faces today.

Millenials in their 20s and 30s are moving into cities at an astounding rate, attracted by the concentration and density of people that they can connect with. At the same time, companies, including startups companies, are increasing moving into dense, dynamic and energetic urban centers where talent entrepreneurs, infrastructure, knowledge and capital are clustered. These two mutually reinforcing dynamics are shifting and shaping the way cities are developed, spurring innovation and revitalization, creating new relationships between local residents, companies and local governments, as well as exposing underlying challenges in cities.

Cities are also home to significant concentrations of the poor and marginalized. Urban poverty is growing12 and the World Bank estimates that, by 2035, most of the world’s extreme poor will be found in urban areas.

Urbanization has significant impacts on the environment and the well-being of urban dwellers. Cities are key contributors to many environmental problems, such as air and water pollution. Pervasive levels of air pollution has been seen recently in China, India and Mexico City. For many cities, municipal waste is a significant problem. Globally, 3 billion urban residents generate 1.2 kg of waste a day - 1.3 billion tonnes per year.14 This generates challenges such as GHG from transporting waste, marine pollution (including plastics) from coast cities, shortage of land for landfill sites and health hazards such as cholera outbreaks, from informal dumps and untreated waste.

Cities are highly vulnerable to climate change impacts. This is due to the fact that many cities are located in highly exposed coastal areas and riverbanks, which are prone to sea level rise, typhoons, storms, flash floods and landslides. Urbanization also displaces open space such as farmland, wetlands, parks and forests and reduces water supply as excessive ground water usage depletes water tables. These degradations significantly reduce the ability of natural ecosystems to filter air and water and provide other ecosystem services.

 

The impacts of climate change and disasters in cities disproportionately affect the poor, who normally settle in compact settlements and slums, on riverbanks and steep slope areas where land is more affordable or settled illegally. These areas are often prone to floods, storms and landslides. In addition, people living in these areas tend to hold informal settlement status and thus receive inadequate or no basic infrastructure and social services support. About one in seven people in the world lives in deteriorated and overcrowded spaces in urban areas.

By 2040, the world’s energy systems will need to serve 9 billion people, with two thirds of them in urban areas. The urban poor in many developing countries who typically have access to some electricity face a number of challenges. They experience irregular supply, frequent blackouts and quality problems associated with the grid electricity such as low or fluctuating voltage.16 Affordability is another barrier, due to high connection fees and tariffs. This can lead to continued use of unsustainable energy sources such as kerosene for lighting or solid fuels for cooking and heating, which cause indoor pollution and increased health and safety risks. Informal or illegal connections are also a common practice in many urban centres. As economies develop, energy demand also increases significantly for uses such as refrigeration, heating and cooling. In Mumbai, India, for example, 40 percent of total electricity consumption is for air-conditioning.

Many cities remain strongly divided and segregated spatially and socially. High and extreme inequality in cities is a driver of violence and unrest. In Latin America, UNDP’s analysis points to a correlation between urbanization and rising crime where institutional capacities to include marginalized groups are inadequate. Conflict-affected countries such as Sudan, Somalia, Yemen, Lebanon and Iraq have cities characterized by an abundance of slums, comprising 50 percent to 90 percent of total urbanization.

Vulnerable groups such as youths, migrants and IDPs often experience marginalization and stigmatization. Amidst waves of conflict- and disaster-driven migration, the displaced are increasingly seeking refuge in urban areas, with over half of the world’s 38 million ID Ps and 13 million refugees living in towns and cities. Beyond displacement, economic migration continues to be a major factor in the growth of cities. In many global

cities such as Sydney, London and New York, migrants make up more than one third of the population. In Asia and Africa, fast-growing secondary and tertiary cities are expected to absorb much of the future population growth through migration, with many migrants moving to, from and amongst rural and urban areas in seasonal and circular flows.

Inequality between cities is also growing. The increasing concentration of wealth in a few attractive cities is driving up the cost of living, forcing lower-paid residents to migrate to distant suburbs or relocate entirely.

In many developing countries, urban unemployment and underemployment are now a rising concern, particularly for youth, women and marginalized groups. One major element of city economies that still generates less attention is the informal economy, yet it accounts for 50 percent to 80 percent of a city’s GDP and provides livelihoods for the majority of poor and excluded groups in many developing countries.

Limited public space for city residents to access and limited opportunities for the public to influence decision-making regarding public space or land use22 expose cities to the risk of future internal conflict (gang violence, riots, civil unrest) and social exclusion based on a population’s immigration or socio-economic status. It also leads to a range of other issues such as reduced physical and mental health and reduced adaptive capacity to cope with heat island effects and flooding.

In order to meet the SDGs by 2030, around 40 percent of the world’s population will need proper housing and access to basic infrastructure and services such as water and sanitation systems. This creates significant pressure on land and housing, particularly in urban areas where supply is limited and policy and regulatory frameworks to manage demand are poorly developed. The urban poor and other vulnerable groups (migrants, IDPs, female-headed households) fare worst, as they lack access to housing, tenure security and land ownership. In many developing countries, this often leads to the emergence of slum settlements. Municipal administrations play a major role in ensuring proper urban planning, service delivery and creation of economic opportunities (e.g., the 14 million jobs that need to be created each year for young people).

However, urbanization is peaking where the capacity to govern is in short supply. Rapidly growing cities in developing countries are struggling to provide the infrastructure, services and governance systems needed by their increasing populations as they deal with competing priorities and demands.

The decentralization reforms that have occurred in many countries, such as in Latin America, have given local governments and local communities increased influence on policies in urban areas. Yet, fiscal decentralization lags behind. City leaders repeatedly point to the lack of urban financing as one of the primary barriers to long-term development. In many instances, the lack of financing options also drives cities towards unsustainable short-term solutions, for instance by selling land for commercial development as a means of financing municipal infrastructure, as has been common in many parts of China. Many municipal authorities, particularly in developing countries, continue to lack access to revenue and the autonomy to generate revenue. Access to affordable finance and enhanced administrative capacities is still needed at all subnational tiers of government – municipal, metropolitan and regional.

Public authorities face increasing difficulty in maintaining effective governance in large cities, due to corruption, the erosion of governance and institutional capabilities in the justice system, law enforcement and security institutions, and poorly managed public space. The degree of social integration and cohesion in a community also affects the rates of crime, violence and peaceful coexistence. Without strong participatory governance systems, the needs of the poor and marginalized, particularly of migrants, IDPs, women and minority groups, are often neglected. Developing countries will need efficient, multi-tiered policy and institutional mechanisms to address the complex and interconnected consequences of urbanization across all tiers of government and with non-state actors. Urbanization is not a challenge exclusively for cities. The shift of populations to urban areas also has economic, social and governance consequences for peri-urban and rural areas that need to be addressed. These surrounding territories provide vital goods and services to cities such as labour and natural resources. In many developing countries, working-age rural dwellers migrate to cities in search of economic opportunities, leaving the very young and the aged behind in rural communities.

Rural-urban migration can also be highly gendered. In many regions, it is mainly the men who leave in search of work, leaving women to work the fields and manage the burden of care.26 In other countries, women go to cities for employment in households, factories or service industries, which provide them with better incomes and greater economic and social empowerment, but also exposes migrant women to the risk of exploitation.27 Declining populations in rural areas also pose challenges for agriculture and for continuing to maintain social service provision for smaller, scattered, aging populations. These challenges are already evident in Europe28 and Japan,29 presaging challenges that developing countries will face in years to come.

The rise of the middle class is becoming more apparent in many regions. In 2009, 1.8 billion people were considered to be middle class, with Europe (664 million), Asia (525 million) and North America (338 million) accounting for the highest number of people in this group. It is estimated that, by 2030, the middle class will account for nearly 5 billion out of the world’s 8 billion people, with most of them living in urban areas. This will continue to drive up global demand for food, water, transport, energy and housing and contribute to GHG emissions, particularly in developing countries where most of this urban growth occurs.30 All 10 of the fastest-growing cities in the world at present are found in developing countries in Asia and Africa. The process of urbanization and the types of cities that emerge in the developing world will deeply affect outcomes of many development challenges in the post-2015 era. The infrastructural and economic characteristics of these growing cities will help determine humanity’s ecological and climate footprints and the degree to which societies are resilient to future climate, social and economic shocks. Success in poverty reduction will be influenced by the degree to which urban poverty is understood, identified and overcome in this urbanization process. Ensuring that these cities develop on sustainable development trajectories is therefore one of the biggest challenges and opportunities on the development landscape.

 

Source: Urbanization Trends. SUSTAINABLE URBANIZATION STRATEGY: UNDP’s Support to Sustainable, Inclusive and Resilient Cities in the Developing World. United Nations Development Programme 2016

 

Thursday, July 18, 2024

Green, Green, Green Program: Key to Making Cities Liveable

 Exposure to natural environments significantly reduces stress levels. Living in spaces surrounded by nature—whether the majestic mountains, the tranquil sea, or lush gardens and forests—is a powerful antidote to stress. (https://business.inquirer.net/468670/the-healing-power-of-greenery#ixzz8gIYcdBTm)

Studies have shown that exposure to natural environments significantly reduces stress levels and profoundly impacts our mental well-being. For instance, people living near green spaces report lower stress levels and decreased cortisol, the stress hormone, which can lead to improved overall health and a more robust immune system. The natural scenery fosters calm and tranquility, a crucial element often missing in urban environments. (https://business.inquirer.net/468670/the-healing-power-of-greenery#ixzz8gIYcdBTm)

Recognizing the important role of the green spaces in creating liveable and sustainable urban centers, the national government has provided an allocation for the “development or enhancement of public open space by creating esplanades, parks, arboretum, or botanical gardens, and building bike lanes, walkways, and green infrastructure (DBM).” Therefore, people in the cities which accounts to “over 50 million Filipinos can look forward to a healthier, more pleasant, and more relaxing life (DBM).”

The program is dubbed as the “Green, Green, Green which is now in full swing and funded under the Local Government Support Fund - Assistance to Cities (LGSF-AC) (DBM).” It assists the Philippines’ 145 cities and their local government units (LGUs) in making their communities more livable, sustainable, and well-connected through the development or enhancement of public open space by creating esplanades, parks, arboretum, or botanical gardens, and building bike lanes, walkways, and green infrastructure(DBM).

The program is a parallel endeavor to the massive national infrastructure development program Build, Build, Build (DBM).

Currently, 100 cities are now processing their project proposals out of the 143 that submitted their expression of interest to avail of the funding (DBM).

Cities are investing in a variety of public open spaces which they have identified as important civic spaces for their citizens. These include: institutional open spaces such as new government centers (10); public squares and plazas (20); mangroves (2); parks (54); waterfronts (25); streets (13). Another 19 cities are still finalizing their proposed site (DBM).

The following are some urban development programs in various cities in the Philippines cited by the DBM in its website:

 ·       Plaza Rehabilitation in San Juan City

·                 ·       Park Redevelopment in Marikina City

·       Park, Plaza, and Port in Dagupan City

·                 ·      Valenzuela City’s Polo Park

·       River esplanades in five cities

·       Wet Park in Iligan City

·       Mangrove Parks in the cities of Mandaue and Masbate

·                 ·    Quezon City’s streetscape project “Gora Lane”

·       Historic Downtown Redevelopment in Antipolo City

·       Redevelopment of waterfront boulevard in Zamboanga City

·       Caloocan City’s nature park



References

Green, Green, Green pushes city governments to build better open spaces. Department of Budget and Management accessed at https://www.dbm.gov.ph/index.php/management-2/758-green-green-green-pushes-city-governments-to-build-better-open-spaces

The healing power of greenery by Ar. John Ian Lee Fulgar. Philippine Daily Inquirer  accessed at (https://business.inquirer.net/468670/the-healing-power-of-greenery#ixzz8gIYcdBTm  / 10:55 AM July 13, 2024

 

 

 

Friday, February 23, 2024

A Productive and Inspiring Week at the Intensive Course in Environmental Planning (ICEP)

 I attended the Intensive Course in Environmental Planning (ICEP) last February 12-16, 2024 conducted by the Planning and Research Foundation, Inc. (PLANADES) in cooperation with the UP-School of Urban and Regional Planning (UP-SURP). The seminar was held at the New SURP Building at UP Diliman.

As a lifelong learner in the environmental planning profession, I consider ICEP as a great learning opportunity with the professors’ par excellence in the country. For me, it was both a refresher and a sort of updating sessions after having been away from my formal classes in Diploma in Land Use Planning (DLUP) which I started in 2017 and finished in 2019.

The five-day course has all the topics that an environmental planner must study to be effective in the profession. It started with the discussion of EnP. Ronnie H. Encarnacion on the history and evolution of planning running thru various epochs and development stages that shaped the emergence of various planning theories and principles. This was followed by the lecture of EnP. Krishna V. Buenaventura on City Growth and Planning Theories which has focused on urbanization principles, theories and trends.  

The ethical standards for environmental planners were succinctly discussed by Dr. Corazon B. Cruz. I was reminded of my responsibilities as a planner and to be proud of being one. I am so delighted to meet her and had a photo with her. I told her that she was our guest of honor during our oath-taking ceremony for new environmental planners in Tagbiliran, Bohol in 2017.

I was again amazed and inspired while listening intently to Professor Ernesto Serote whom we regard as the father of local development planning in the country. His topic was Rationalized Planning System (RPS) which he developed and authored. RPS is considered as the bible of local development planning. The RPS was later on adopted by the DILG as its important material in local development planning. I even bought Prof. Serote’s book Property, Patrimony, and Territory and had him personally autographed and posed a picture with him. The first time I had the chance to listen to Prof. Serote’s lecture on RPS was in 2015 in Tacloban City when I attended the seminar for aspiring environmental planners conducted by Philworld Gateway managed by Enp Nick Tabungar.

A lecture on population and demography came next by Prof. Carmeli Marie Chaves and such topic is crucial in planning as the present number of people and its projected increase in a community are prime consideration in addressing current and future needs.

The succeeding lectures have focused on various development sectors and subsectors. These included Social Development Sector Planning by EnP Maria Veronica Arreza-Arcilla; Economic Development Sector Planning by Dean Dina C. Magnaye; Institutional Development Sector Planning by Atty. Mark Anthony M. Gamboa; Infrastructure and Utilities Development Sector Planning by EnP Ma. Sheila G. Napalang, and; Environment and Natural Resources Development Sector Planning by For. Jose M. Ragunay. Transportation Planning was discussed by Dr. Jun T. Castro; Risk Sensitive Comprehensive Land Use and Development Planning by Dr. Engr. Tabassam Rasa; Area Development Planning by Enp Nick Espina, Jr. and; Project Planning by Prof. Crispin E.D. Diaz.

During the weeklong course, I was so glad to have met and saw in person some of my former professors in UPOU, specifically, Dean Dina Magnaye and Prof. Jonathan John Maldupana whom I had the opportunity to have a picture with. One of the lecturers Prof. Nick Espina was also my former professor.

For those who aspire to join the world of environmental planning and be the best in this field, I advise you to attend the future ICEP.







Friday, February 2, 2024

Local Government and Decentralization

 

Governance is about how local government bodies ensure that they are doing the right things, in the right way, for the right people, in a timely, open, inclusive, honest and accountable manner (p.2). It comprises the systems, processes, and cultures and values by which local government bodies are directed and controlled, and through which they account to, engage with and, where appropriate lead their communities (pp.2-3).

At the heart of local governance is decentralization and local autonomy which is mandated by the 1987 Philippine Constitution specifically under section 3 whereby the Congress is mandated “to enact a local government code that will institutionalize decentralization.” Hence, came the Local Government Code of 1991 which basically provides under sec 2 Book I that LGUs “shall genuine and meaningful autonomy to enable them to attain their fullest development as self-reliant communities…”

Salient Features of Decentralization

Decentralization refers to the transfer of powers and functions from a higher or central level of authority to a lower level government or field offices of central units. There are basically two modes by which decentralization can be effected. These are through devolution and deconcentration (Cabo:128). 

Deconcentration decentralizes functions from central government agencies to its field units. The transfer of functions takes place within the same administrative machinery of government, from the central office to its field units or offices. Deconcentration is administrative in nature, hence, it is also called administrative deconcentration (p.128).

Devolution is political in character for it transfers powers and functions from the national government to local government. In effect, devolution empowers local governments by giving it wider scope of discretion and decisionmaking powers. The passage of the 1991 Local Government Code is an act of devolution (Cabo, p129). The Local Government Code devolved powers and functions including the delivery of basic services: responsibility to enforce regulatory powers; powers to increase financial resources by broadening their taxing powers, shares from internal revenues, and the exploitation of national wealth; legitimization of participation for civil society in local governance; and authority to engage in entrepreneurial and development activities (Reyes: 359).

Privatization involves the assumption by a business corporate of a service or function performed by government (Cabo:129).

Relevance to the Country

          Decentralization has been adopted to improve the delivery of public services, and the management of public affairs among newly-independent nations (Reyes:167). Brillantes, Jr. asserts that governments have adopted to decentralization because of the merits of facilitating speedy “decisionmaking processes by decongesting central government and reducing red tape” while at the same time increasing citizens’ participation and empowerment to engender a “more open and democratic government” (Brillantes, 2003:324) (Reyes:167). Decentralization brought much optimism to liberate local political units from extreme reliance and dependency on the national government. It “strengthens and empowers the LGUs to be at the helm of forging their futures, especially in the aspects of fighting poverty, engendering development, self-reliance, consolidating good governance practices and reinvigorating democracy (Reyes:176).”

How Decentralization was Implemented

          Decentralization was implemented with the passage of the Local Government Code of 1991. As it is, the LGC covers a vast and bulky enumeration of policies and mandate provided in four books divided into 536 sections to transform local government units into self-reliant communities. It is this a complex codified body of legislation that captures the many facets and aspects of local governance that had been neglected if not conveniently ignored through many attempts because of vested interests in the legislature and in the national government, which has been disinclined to share power and authority (Reyes: 172.)

According to Reyes (2016), based on a rough and preliminary assessment, the following could be identified as some of the recognized salutary gains of the LGC during the last 25 years (Reyes:173-176):

1.     - Grassroots empowerment and greater citizens’ participation in the communities.

2.    - Greater involvement of civil society and people’s organizations and the private sector in policy-making and in the management of public affairs.

3.    - The rise and strengthening of inter-local cooperation thru the establishment of Leagues of Local Government Units and Elective Officials

4.    - Consciousness on the rights of Local Government Units and greater transparency

5.    - Recognition of Best Practices under the Galing Pook Awards (Excellent or Best Localities) Program

6.     - Anti-poverty and development initiatives at the local levels

7.     - Participation in local elections by the citizenry remained strong, if not strengthened

8.     - Women leaders are on the rise

Reyes (2016) further said the LGC should not be regarded as a nostrum or a cure-all, one-size-formula that will correct the many multifarious problems that beset communities. In fact, he listed down the following dysfunctions (Reyes:176-179):

1.     The problematic of the absorptive capacities of LGUs has not matched the demands of responsibilities entrusted by the Code.

2.     The financial capacities of LGUs leave much to be desired

3.     - Many local governments continue to be dependent on their shares of the Internal Revenue Allotment

4.     - The national government continues to hold and control the bulk of productive sources of revenue even in the Post-Code Period (Llanto, 2013)

5.     - There is a wide disparity in the distribution of government personnel between the national government and the LGUs.

6.     - The poverty incidence has not been contained.

7.     - Political dynasties remain well-entrenched in the various provinces, cities and towns of the country.

Brillantes, Llanto, Alm, and Sosmena (forthcoming 2009) conducted many consultations in major regions of the country and have identified the following the key issues and challenges pertaining to the implementation of the LGC drawn from the study (Reyes:371-373).

1.       Local Personnel Administration/Human Resource Development, Organization, and Staffing

The professionalization of the local bureaucracy has been considered as one important issue. More specifically, the study highlights the following issues that emerged: 1.) low compensation of local officials, 2.) low compensation/pay of barangay officials and staff, 3.) certain sector are not given priority at the local level, 4.) need to clarify specific positions at the local level, and 5.) unclear career path of local appointive officials.

2.       National-Local Relations

These are related to 1.) lack of synchronization/harmony between national and local government development planning and action, 2.) NGAs generally bypass local development plan formulated by LGUs; and 3.) unclear conditions concerning the creation and conversion of LGUs.

3.       Local Government Performance Measurement

The study found that there continues to be: 1.) a lack of a well-crafted and functional performance measurement system of LGUs, and 2.) the proliferation of performance indicators and lack of awareness of such indicators by LGUs.

4.       Capacity Building

The main issues here are: 1.) lack of awareness and appreciation of a comprehensive capacity building program for local governments, and 3.) election of local officials who are not ready or prepared to assume the position due to lack of technical skills.

5.       People Participation

Inasmuch as the LGC has created an enabling framework for genuine people participation in local governance, key issues remains including: 1.) unclear relations between non-governmental organizations (NGOs) to operationalize their participation, 2.) inability of many LGUs to fill-up the 25% NGOs mandatory representation requirement, and 3.) LCEs do not convene the local development council.

6.       Political Concern

The study validated that: 1.) the current 3-year term of local officials does not allow authentic development work, 2.) Sangguniang Kabataan seems to be highly politicized, and 3.) unclear rules and procedures of Congress in the conduct of referendum.

7.       Federalism

Finally, the study echoed the high hopes and opportunities that federalism may bring as a possible politico-administrative set-up to push decentralization in the Philippines (Brillantes, Llanto, Alm, and Sosmena 2009:52-59).

Reflection

          As for me, the struggle on giving flesh and blood to good local governance thru decentralization is a long marathon. All those issues mentioned above should be addressed to achieve the goals of decentralization. Doing so requires the active participation and engagement of the government, the private sector and the civil society. With federalism being considered by the current leadership to empower local government units, I agree with PA scholars that it should spin-off from the gains and shortcomings of our experiences with the present mode of decentralization as contemplated by the LGC.

In the area of politics, it is very important to develop an educated and responsible citizenry that will elect good leaders that will form a well-performing and responsive bureaucracy. It is equally important for the society to develop values and norms that complements with the demands for high level of ethical standards in public service. Though the Wilsonian doctrine of “administration-politics dichotomy” is the most ideal condition, there remains the fact that the quality of bureaucracy we have depends on our political choices basically on how we elect our leaders and how we participate in policy deliberations.

Effective decentralization means effective and efficient management of the bureaucracy. Professionalization of government positions in the local level must give way to the patronage and spoils tradition. The use of modern technology and communications technology should be fully harnessed to keep up with the demands of the Fourth Industrial Revolution to speed up service delivery and to improve transparency, accountability and participation. Sustainability and continuity of good programs of previous administrations and the private sector should be ensured by the present administrators to keep development track on the right direction.

References:

Cabo, Wilhelmina L., P201 Theories and Practice of Public Administration, University of the Philippine Open University, 1997.

Delivering Good Governance and in Local Government Framework edited by Sarah Lloyd. CIPFA The Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy, 2007, UK accessed at httpsdemocracy.york.gov.ukdocumentss82198CIPFADeliveringGoodGovernanceinLocalGovernmentFramework1.pdf.pdf

Reyes, Danilo dela Rosa. Issues and Problems in Decentralization and Local Autonomy in the Philippines: A Preliminary Assessment of Impact and Challenges. Journal of Politics and Governance, Vol. 6, Special Issue, September – December, 2016 accessed thru httpcopag.msu.ac.thjournalfilesjournal6-Special%20Issue130120175022212.Danilo%20de%20la%20Rosa%20Reyes.pdf accessed on 03-10-2020.

 

Reyes, Danilo, R. History and Context of the Development of Public Administration in the Philippines, Public Administration in Southeast Asia (Thailand, Philippines, Malaysia, Hongkong, and Macao) edited by Evan MM. Berman (CRC Press 2011) pp. 333-352 accessed at http://blancopeck.net/Public-Administration-in-Southeast-Asia.pdf on 02-07-2020

 

The Local Government Code of 1991

The 1987 Philippine Constitution

 

 

Tuesday, January 23, 2024

Local Governance: Structure and System

 

Local Governance

According to UNDP, “governance is about the processes by which public policy decisions are made and implemented. It is the result of interactions, relationships and networks between the different sectors (government, public sector, private sector and civil society) and involves decisions, negotiation, and different power relations between stakeholders to determine who gets what, when and how.”

Simply put, governance is the interplay of the government, private sector and civil society organizations. From this meaning, local governance therefore is not solely the function of the local government. It is rather the local government interfacing with the private sector and the civil society organizations within the framework of transparency, accountability and participation towards achieving meaningful local autonomy.

 

A. Local Government Structure and System

The structure of the local government is defined by the 1987 Philippine Constitution and the Local Government Code of 1991. These laws, primarily the Constitution (sec. 1, Art. X) have defined the political subdivisions at the local level which is three-tiered – the province, the city/municipality and the barangays. Aside the from this, there is also an established autonomous region in Mindanao which is now called as the Bangsamoro Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (BARMM). These local government units were given more powers, authority, responsibilities and resources by the national government thru a system of decentralization (sec. 2, LGC).

The provincial government is headed by the provincial governor. The legislative body is the Provincial Board which is composed by the vice-governor and the regular members of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan,

The city is headed by the city mayor (section 445, LGC). The Sangguniang Panlungsod, the legislative body of the city is composed of the city vice-mayor as presiding officer, the regular sanggunian members, the president of the city chapter of the liga ng mga Barangay, the president of the panlungsod na pederasyon ng mga Sangguniang Kabataan, and the sectoral representatives, as members (section 457, LGC).

The municipality is headed by the municipal mayor (section 444, LGC). The local legislative body is composed of the municipal vice-mayor as the presiding officer, the regular sanggunian members, the president of the municipal chapter of the liga ng mga Barangay, the president of the pambayang pederasyon ng mga Sangguniang Kabataan, and the sectoral representatives, as members (section 446, LGC).

The barangay is headed by the punong barangay (section 398, LGC). The Sangguniang Barangay is composed of the punong barangay, seven (7) barangay kagawad, SK Chairperson, barangay treasurer and barangay secretary, as members (section 387, LGC).

Local Government Supervision

The President of the Philippines exercises overall supervision of the local government unit (sec. 25 (a), LGC). The provincial governor has supervisory function over the municipal mayors (sec. 29, LGC) who in turn have supervisory function over the barangays within one’s jurisdiction (sec. 32, LGC). Component cities are under the supervision of the province (section 452 (b), LGC). Independent component cities and highly urbanized cities are independent from the province (section 451, LGC). The LGUs, thru an ordinance may group as well to achieve a cooperative undertaking (section 33, LGC).

       Local Leagues

There are leagues established in every level of local government authority. At the barangays level, there is the Liga ng mga Barangay (section 491, LGC) and SK Federation (sec. 436, LGC) in the municipal up to the provincial level. There is also the league of councilors/legislators, league of municipalities/cities/provinces (sections 496-504, LGC) These leagues have their umbrella called Union of Local Authorities of the Philippines (ULAP) (Executive Order 351, series of 2004.)

 

B. Private Sector and the Civil Society Organizations and People’s Participation

The Local Government Code and other laws guarantee the important role of the private sector (sec.3 (l) LGC) and the civil society organizations which were then called as people’s organization and non-government organization (sections 34-36, LGC). In fact, it is a mandate for every local government unit to have representatives in their respective local special bodies like the city/municipal/barangay development council (sec. 106-107, LGC), the local health board(sec. 102, LGC), local school board (sec. 98, LGC), peace and order council (sec. 166, LGC), bids and awards committee (sec. 37, LGC), solid waste management committee (RA9003), disaster risk-reduction and management council (RA10121), among others.

The Local Government Code also guarantees the system of recall whereby registered voters may “recall” a local official (sec. 70, LGC), and propose, enact or amend an ordinance thru a system of local initiative and referendum (sections 120-127, LGC).

At the barangay level, the LGC guarantees people’s participation in decision-making thru the conduct of barangay assembly which shall meet twice a year (sec. 397 (a)), LGC).

 

MAJOR ISSUE FACING LOCAL GOVERNANCE STRUCTURE

 

Proposed Shift to Federalism

In so far as the structure of local governance is concerned, the biggest issue that the country now face is the proposed shift from unitary system to a federal system. This shift to federal form of government means adding another layer of government which is the regional or federated states and giving extensive powers to it.

 

According to Abueva, “a federal system, such more than a unitary system, will respond to the long-felt demands of local political leaders and businessmen for their release from the costly time-consuming, stifling, and demoralizing effects of excessive centralization and controls by the national government in the unitary system. The highly decentralized structures and process of the federation will challenge, empower and energize the people and their state and local governments; encourage creativity, initiative, and innovation, enhance the accountability of government leaders and employees, spur inter-state competition, and foster state and local self-reliance.”

 

As of now, this proposal has been stalled as lawmakers are divided into a number of issues like the number of regions or federal states to established and as to the manner of forging this constitutional amendment or revision which is either thru the Congress as a constituent assembly or thru a Constitutional Convention. The public also seems to have misgivings about this proposal due to lack of information and understanding regarding this issue.

 

 

References:

Abueva, Jose V. Towards a Federal Republic of the Philippines http://tacdrup.tripod.com/tacdrup/towards.pdf

A Users’ Guide to Measuring Local Governance. UNDP. accessed at http://www.undp.org/content/dam/aplaws/publication/en/publications/democratic-governance/dg publications-for-website/a-users-guide-to-measuring-local-governance-/LG%20Guide.pdf

Brillantes Jr., Alex. and Sonco, II Jose Tiu. “Decentralization and Local Governance in the Philippines, Public Administration in Southeast Asia”, edited by Evan M. Berman, CRC Press, 2011

Executive Order 351, series of 2004

Local Government Code of 1991

1987 Philippine Constitution

 

  YEAR PASSERS EXAM TAKERS PASSING RATE 2007 19 36 52.8 ...